Fence Contractor Hires Illegal Aliens

Wash Times

The head of a California company hired by the U.S. government to help build a fence along the Southwest border to curb the flow of illegal aliens into the United States has been sentenced on charges of hiring illegals for the job.
Mel Kay Jr., 64, founder, chairman and president of the Golden State Fence Co., pleaded guilty in December in federal court in San Diego to felony charges of hiring the illegals and was sentenced Wednesday to six months home confinement, three months probation and 1,040 hours of community service.

'Cause why should your company pay good wages when you can take advantage of the people you're hired to keep out? And natch the executives get a slap on the wrist and a fine that's probably smaller than their profits on this one job alone.

You know if a lot of people could find ways to break the law, get a few million as a result, and then have to pay a fine of say $100K - we might think about changes in the way we fine and punish people.

But as long as it's just the executives and well-connected, the ability to make more money on the crime than you pay for the punishment will continue.

Katrina? What Katrina?

You know when you can't trust a source, you stop using the source. Google might want to keep that in mind as it futzes with Google Maps.

Google's popular map portal has replaced post-Hurricane Katrina satellite imagery with pictures taken before the storm, leaving locals feeling like they're in a time loop and even fueling suspicions of a conspiracy.
Scroll across the city and the Mississippi Gulf Coast, and everything is back to normal: Marinas are filled with boats, bridges are intact and parks are filled with healthy, full-bodied trees.

"Come on," said an incredulous Ruston Henry, president of the economic development association in New Orleans' devastated Lower 9th Ward. "Just put in big bold this: 'Google, don't pull the wool over the world's eyes. Let the truth shine.'"

I don't know why you're doin' this Google, but cut it out. If your maps aren't up to date, I'll find another source.

TJ Maxx executives get the TJ Minn consequences

Boston Globe:

At least 45.7 million credit and debit card numbers were stolen by hackers who accessed the computer systems at the TJX Cos. at its headquarters in Framingham and in the United Kingdom over a period of several years, making it the biggest breach of personal data ever reported, according to security specialists.
While details are still sketchy, TJX said unauthorized software placed on its computer systems stole at least 100 files containing data on millions of accounts from systems that process and store transaction information in Framingham and Watford, United Kingdom

So who's been fired as a result of the security policies that allowed this to happen? The CEO (salary 2.16MM - not including stock)? Nope. The head of Information Technology? Nope. His or her head of Security? Nope.

In Bush America there are no consequences anymore. Hey, shit happens. Deal. But we're not going to let any of our gold-plated executives take the blame for anything. As a matter of fact, if someone does get fired, it'll be some mid-management sucker who doesn't have enough money to suck up to the right high-level "investigation" committee.

h/t Americablog

Women, don't get married!!!

Married women, think seriously about getting divorced. Why? Well, it turns out (and believe me, this was unknown to me when I said "I do") that if you're married, you cannot deny consent to sex with your husband. Why not? Because you consented to sex (anytime, anywhere apparently) when you got married.

[Phyllis] Schlafly, now 81, brought her long-running campaign to Bates College on Wednesday night in a lecture titled "Conservativism vs. Feminism: The Great Debate,"...

For nearly two hours, she belittled the feminist movement as "teaching women to be victims," decried intellectual men as "liberal slobs" and argued that feminism "is incompatible with marriage and motherhood."....

Schlafly asserted women should not be permitted to do jobs traditionally held by men, such as firefighter, soldier or construction worker, because of their "inherent physical inferiority."...

At one point, Schlafly also contended that married women cannot be sexually assaulted by their husbands.

"By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape," she said.

I have to rethink this whole thing now. I never knew the marriage vows entailed no-consequence forcible sex by either spouse. Yikes. Where did it say that in the marriage license?!?! - I swear I read it.

Don't you love women like Schlafly? Go around the country (wearing pants too) spouting their views for all to hear when their views are that women should have no public views. We belong at home (in dresses) meekly listening to our husbands' sage advice (and yours is sage David, but not all is). If women have no business in business, or politics or anywhere but the home - what is Schlafly doing out and about speaking to others as though a woman's views carry any weight at all in society?

Phyllis, follow your own damn advice and go home and shut up. If you're against women having any rights, give up your own, but don't take away mine or Catharine's, who by the way, if she wants to be a firefighter, will damn well be a firefighter.

"Memories light the corners of my...." How does it go again?

If there's one thing I have learned from the Bush Administration it is that memory lapses are priceless. From Alberto Gonzalez to Lurita Doan (see here and here) to Irv Lewis (Scooter) Libby, these folks can't remember their own names without a scorecard.

I have to keep that in mind if I'm ever questioned by anyone in authority. "I don't remember." "I have no recollection of that." "I really couldn't say." Gee, that's easy.

At least Lurita remembered there were cookies at the important meeting. I wonder if she remembers what kind. Funny how the cookies stayed in the memory of this woman with a bachelors and masters degree, but the contents of the meeting just floated, floated away. "Oops, there they go. Oh, they're gone." Now I've been in the business world long enough to have attended thousands of meetings. I don't remember every one, but I remember the gist of most of them. Especially if there was anything controversial being discussed. Don't tell me that possibly violating the Hatch Act wouldn't be considered controversial? You'd think that even if Lurita was planning on skipping the cookie meeting, she would have had the sense heaven gave a louse and decided that maybe she better show up and put the cabash on any corrupt kooky-talk in her office.

And besides, any good manager knows that you write up the minutes of a meeting. Where are the notes Lurita?

See post on Doan below for the backstory.

Care about your retirement account?

AP reports that class action lawsuits are coming before the Supreme Court. Big Bidness wants to make it harder for shareholders to sue companies who lie in annual reports and the liars who enable them (accounting firms, investment banks, etc.)

Echoes of the 2002 business scandals reverberate through a case before the Supreme Court that could make it tougher for shareholders to win lawsuits against public companies.

Justices are hearing arguments Wednesday in a case involving Tellabs Inc., a manufacturer of fiber optic equipment, which was sued by shareholders over statements made in 2001 by its then-chief executive about its sales that turned out to be false. Shareholders lost millions when the stock price dropped after Tellabs corrected the CEO's statements.

Gee, I wonder whose side the administration is on - Corporations or Investors? Hmmm...

Wait for it.....

The case pits the Bush administration and corporate America against public pension funds, investor advocates and 32 states and territories. At stake: untold billions of dollars in shareholders' suits against corporations, executives and directors for alleged fraud.

Huh, what a surpirse, the Bush Administration is on the side of the Corporations? My my. Here's more.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has come into the case on the side of the Bush Justice Department and business interests, a move that prompted criticism from shareholder advocates who questioned the market watchdog agency's commitment to investor protection. SEC Chairman Christopher Cox has insisted that the agency's stance is in the best interest of investors because it seeks to restrict what he calls "fraudulent lawsuits."
The opposing sides are making their case at a time when business interests are pushing for restraints on class-action suits against companies and executives. They contend that laws and rules that came in response to the wave of corporate scandals nearly five years ago — Enron Corp., WorldCom Inc. and the rest — are onerous and costly and hurt the competitiveness of U.S. financial markets.

The idea that SEC regulations make the market less efficient is INSANE. The stock market needs investors to have faith that the market listings accurately reflect the value of the company. If we don't have that, what is the beauty of being listed on the NYSE? Might as well be listed on the stock exchange of Lesotho or Swaziland.

People, it is time to get serious about getting the administration out of office. They are actively working against the interests of the people. Every day. All the Time. IN ALL BRANCHES OF THE EXECUTIVE.

Using the Government (Yet Again)

If you've read the two former posts, you've maybe been waiting for the BIG ONE. The one wherein administration and congressional insiders move the BIG money around from Joe Littleguy to Biff Moneybags. Could this be an example?

In that note to Joshua Bolten, President Bush's chief of staff, Waxman requested information about a $140,000 contract the White House awarded in July 2002 to MZM, Inc. This was Mitchell Wade's company. He's the (now former-) military contractor who paid more than $1 million in bribes to Republican Representative Randy "Duke" Cunningham, who's in jail for having accepted these and other bribes in return for steering federal contracts to Wade and Brent Wilkes, another defense contractor. (Wade pleaded guilty; Wilkes has not.) What's intriguing about the contract Wade received from the White House is that its amount equals the price Wade paid in August 2002 to buy the Duke-Stir, the yacht Cunningham lived (and partied) on in Washington. According to the sentencing recommendation memo in Cunningham's case, Cunningham himself negotiated the $140,000 purchase price of the boat in the summer of 2002. This raises the intriguing possibility that Wade that summer needed money to buy Cunningham the yacht and--presto--a White House contract materialized.

And there's more: this contract was Wade's first prime contract with the federal government. The firm had been incorporated in 1993 but had pulled in no revenue through 2001. So Cunningham scandal watchers have wondered, did a White House contract help launch Wade on his felonious ways, and was this contract legitimate?

The modest contract reportedly covered supplying computers and office furniture to Vice President Dick Cheney's office. By the time it was signed, MZM, which had become an approved federal contractor only two months earlier, was already bribing Cunningham, a member of the influential defense appropriations subcommittee. Two months later, in September 2002, MZM hit it big, scoring a $250 million, five-year contract with the General Services Administration. Look at the timeline, one congressional investigator notes: May, MZM was listed as a federal supplier; July, it won a White House contract for $140,000; September, it obtained a $250 million contract. A not-too-suspicious mind could wonder if something--or someone--was juicing the process.

Hell, where do I sign up to go from zero revenue to a $140K govt. contract to a $250MM govt. contract all in a matter of months? Oh, yeah, I don't have the "right" friends in high places.

From David Corn

Using the Goverment (Again)

From McClatchy

Monica Goodling, the Department of Justice official who said Monday that she'll invoke the Fifth Amendment rather than talk to lawmakers, is a frequent figure in department e-mails released so far as part of the congressional investigation into the firings and hirings of U.S. attorneys.

Goodling, 33, is a 1995 graduate Messiah College in Grantham, Pa., an institution that describes itself as "committed to embracing an evangelical spirit."

She received her law degree at Regent University in Virginia Beach, Va. Regent, founded by Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, says its mission is "to produce Christian leaders who will make a difference, who will change the world."
...
Goodling took a leading role in making sure that Tim Griffin, a protege of presidential adviser Karl Rove, replaced H.E. "Bud" Cummins as the U.S. attorney in Arkansas. Documents released to Congress include communications between Goodling and Scott Jennings, Rove's deputy.

Yeah, that sounds very Christian. I'm sure that Jesus would have been all over using the government to reward Peter and to really screw over Judas. To the victor, go the spoils. That's in the Bible, isn't it? Gospel of Mammon Chapter 13? No? Acts of the Capitalists Chapter 11? No?! Are you sure?

Using the Government to Reward Friends and Punish Enemies

From Think Progress:

Tomorrow, General Services Administration chief Lurita Doan will testify before Congress about her potentially illegal activity.

House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) has discovered that in January, Doan asked “senior GSA officials to help ‘our candidates’ in the next elections through targeted public events.” Doan discussed with GSA officials “how to exclude House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from an upcoming courthouse opening in San Francisco and how to include Republican Senator Mel Martinez.” Last summer, she also signed a $20,000 no-bid contract for a 24-page report “promoting GSA’s use of minority- and women-owned businesses.” The firm was run by a woman with whom Doan “had a long-standing business relationship” and personal friendship, and was eventually canceled by agency officials.

The current administration HATES government - unless they are using it to award contracts to friends or to hurt the enemies of friends. Like Cheney meeting w/Energy Execs and refusing to release information on who or what was discussed.

Evils of Daycare?

From the NIH:

The most recent analysis of a long-term NIH-funded study found that children who received higher quality child care before entering kindergarten had better vocabulary scores in the fifth grade than did children who received lower quality care.

The study authors also found that the more time children spent in center-based care before kindergarten, the more likely their sixth grade teachers were to report such problem behaviors as “gets in many fights,” “disobedient at school,” and “argues a lot.”

Sounds kinds scary, right? Uh-oh, problems at school?! Fights!?! Disobedient?!?!?!? Better have moms just stay at home, huh?

Oh, wait, let's continue reading into paragraph 3:

However, the researchers cautioned that the increase in vocabulary and problem behaviors was small, and that parenting quality was a much more important predictor of child development than was type, quantity, or quality, of child care.

Um, OK. You might want to mention that in the title? But, there's more idiocy to this study:

In the study, child care was defined as care by anyone other than the child's mother who was regularly scheduled for at least 10 hours per week.

Um, you mean like the FATHER!?!?!?! Child care is defined as being cared for by the FATHER?!?! Oh, horrors. Anyone not the mother because mothers are parents, but fathers are "child care." And there's no distinction between fathers, relatives, nannies, small child care providers or large day care centers. They are all "non-mother" and therefore all lumped together as "child care."

Give me a freakin' break. And, NIH, next time you publish an abstract of a study you might not want to bury the lede:

"It would not be possible to go into a classroom and with no additional information, pick out which children had been in center care, Dr. Belsky explained."

NIH Shame on you - DO OVER!

Airlines and tantrums

I guess I missed this story a few weeks back. Air travel provokes tantrum. I guess adults aren't the only ones freaking out on airplanes these days.

Even when they don't have to deal with lost luggage, interminable tarmac delays, or charges of surly service, airlines have another issue to add to their growing list of problems: children who won't obey flight attendants, parents, or rules of decent behavior.

AirTran seized the bull by the horns in December by forcibly disembarking a Massachusetts couple whose 3-year-old daughter refused to take her seat, buckle her seat belt, or stop screaming.

The family got seats on another flight to Boston plus three free seats on any future AirTran flight. They took the first offer but declined the second.

What happened next boggles the mind: AirTran got 14,000 calls and emails endorsing their action.

Speaking as a parent, I applaud AirTrain too. Children, like all of us, want what they want when the want it. They, unlike us, have much less control in most situations. I empathize with their frustration. But parents, the world does not revolve around your children. If they can't take a seat on an airplane and get buckled in, the flight crew should have the ability to boot your family from the plane rather than hold 100+ passengers hostage to your child's temper tantrum. I disagree that all children should sit together (with their parents) at the rear of the plane. Don't throw us all into the same category. All toddlers are no more alike than all adults, all men, or all women. If the airlines really want to deal better with this, they would space out the passengers on the plane a little better (more leg room), would stop making insane projections as to connection times, and would generally treat passengers in a way that doesn't leave everyone on edge from check-in through baggage claim.

Stumbling Blocks

Some good young Christian boys recently completed a survey at a site called "Rebelution" about the "stumbling blocks" to being good young Christian boys.

What are those "stumbling blocks"? Well, women of course. In various states of dress and undress. It seems the good young Christian boys are completely without any self-control and really really need good young Christian girls, or really ALL girls, to "dress modestly" so that the good young Christian boys don't have to actually exercise any self-control.

Responses show that:

Thin material is immodest (and goodness knows its cooler than thick material, but you have to sweat sometimes to help the good young Christian boys)
Wearing a tight shirt under an open button-down shirt is immodest
When a girl reaches into her shirt to adjust a bra strap it is a stumbling block
Seeing a girl's chest bounce when she is walking or running is a stumbling block
Seeing a girl stretching (e.g. arching the back, reaching the arms back, and sticking out the chest) is a stumbling block.
A purse with the strap diagonally across the chest draws too much attention to the bust
Immodest clothing is a problem (for you) when a girl in your own family wears it (ewwww)

But in case you think it's just about the clothes, here are a few responses about "attitude" and "posture".

A modestly dressed girl can still be a stumbling block because of her attitude and behavior.
...
A modestly dressed girl can still be a stumbling block when she is moving an acting in ways that make it clear that she is not modest at heart. This can inspire thoughts in my mind that tempt me to sin, even though her body is covered.
...
If you’re not showing much but still playing the “elusive sexy vixen” then you might as well be wearing a bikini. Because it is very easy to imagine a girl in one.

So you see women and girls, it's your responsibility to dress and act not in a manner that is pleasing to you, but rather to dress and act in a manner that will not tempt these hapless good young Christian boys. It is your job to make yourself sexually undesirable. Slouching, cowering, wearing sweats? Those are good. Standing straight, walking tall, wearing what you like? Not good.

Men already have so much to do, what with running the world and all, they really can't take the added pressure of having to not think about sex when you wear your purse strap across your chest - even though the across the chest position is safer and better for your back.

As one of the respondents put it himself:

The female body is a powerful gift, intended for one man.

Yeah genius, except that it's a gift to herself. To do with as SHE pleases. If you good young Christian boys can’t interact with women without stumbling you should just go sit down in private and leave the rest of society, you know, the part with self-control, to be out in public.
(h/t Feministe)

South Caroline House rules "Women Stupid"

From The State

Women seeking abortions would have to see a fetal ultrasound before the procedure under a bill given key approval in the S.C. House Wednesday.

After three hours of passionate debate, the House voted 91-23 to require women to sign a statement swearing they had seen an ultrasound image of their fetus before getting an abortion.
...
Forcing a victim of a crime to see the results is tantamount to forcing her to relive the ordeal, Rutherford said. “You all are doing it to her once again.”

But Delleney said the fetus is no less precious.

The fetus is no less precious. OMG. How is it possible to reach people who are so wrapped up in a mythology?

Forcing women to see the ultrasound, as though the words "you're pregnant" don't already bring it home to her is just another example of many men and women in the anti-abortion crowd viewing women (i.e., carriers of the "precious" cargo) as dumb as a single rock.

But it may actually have the opposite effect of what they imagine in their mostly old mostly male minds. As a mom, who's had many ultrasounds, even those in the post-30 week period barely looked like a baby. There are baby-aspects, but it sure doens't look like a person. And those from the 10-12 week period (which is when the vast majority of abortions occur) don't look like anything at all.

There is a difference between "human life" - which is pretty much any human cells on a petri dish (lung cells, skin cells) - because they're alive and they're of human origin; and a "human being".

"The rule of law goes out the window"

I used the term 'banana republic' in a prior post - but people, we really are getting there. Look at today's WaPo

The leader of the Justice Department team that prosecuted a landmark lawsuit against tobacco companies said yesterday that Bush administration political appointees repeatedly ordered her to take steps that weakened the government's racketeering case.

Sharon Y. Eubanks said Bush loyalists in Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales's office began micromanaging the team's strategy in the final weeks of the 2005 trial, to the detriment of the government's claim that the industry had conspired to lie to U.S. smokers.

She said a supervisor demanded that she and her trial team drop recommendations that tobacco executives be removed from their corporate positions as a possible penalty. He and two others instructed her to tell key witnesses to change their testimony. And they ordered Eubanks to read verbatim a closing argument they had rewritten for her, she said.
...

Eubanks, who retired from Justice in December 2005, said she is coming forward now because she is concerned about what she called the "overwhelming politicization" of the department demonstrated by the controversy over the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. Lawyers from Justice's civil rights division have made similar claims about being overruled by supervisors in the past.

Eubanks said Congress should not limit its investigation to the dismissal of the U.S. attorneys.

"Political interference is happening at Justice across the department," she said. "When decisions are made now in the Bush attorney general's office, politics is the primary consideration. . . . The rule of law goes out the window."

When the goverment starts working AGAINST the interests of the people and FOR the interests of the wealthy and powerful we are all in trouble. What is it going to take for Americans to demand a change in our goverment? Do we have to see environmental laws rolled back? no food inspections? no highway traffic safety? Oh wait, are we there yet?

Tony Snow was for presidential advisors testifying under oath before he was against it.

Trib Here's Tony Snow in his own words.

"In order to exonerate the chief, aides have made fantastic claims: that they lied to their personal diaries, that Velcro-brained lawyers couldn't recall crucial incidents, that files vanished or moved from one place to another as if by magic, that scores of people with nothing to gain from lying nevertheless perjured themselves, and that this contagion of amnesia, sloppiness and venality was just the gosh darnedest series of coincidences ever witnessed by man or beast.
..
"Evidently, [the president] wants to shield virtually any communications that take place within the White House compound on the theory that all such talk contributes in some way, shape or form to the continuing success and harmony of an administration. Taken to its logical extreme, that position would make it impossible for citizens to hold a chief executive accountable for anything. He would have a constitutional right to cover up.

"Chances are that the courts will hurl such a claim out, but it will take time.

"One gets the impression that [the administration] values its survival more than most people want justice and thus will delay without qualm...Most of us want no part of a president who is cynical enough to use the majesty of his office to evade the one thing he is sworn to uphold the rule of law."

Oh, wait that was when CLINTON was president. I forgot the rules change when an emperor takes the presidency.

Here's something else to consider:

CNN's Ed Henry hit the nail on the head: if no conversations occurred with the President, and no advice was given, then how can the White House assert executive privilege, claiming the need to shield Presidential advice. Tony Snow's response: "That's an intriguing question."

Intriguing indeed.

Checks and balances

From Kos

Realize that the resolution of this stand-off will determine the extent to which the Congress is able to investigate everything that's still on their plate. If they lose this showdown, they lose their leverage in investigating NSA spying, the DeLay/Abramoff-financed Texas redistricting, Cheney's Energy Task Force, the political manipulation of science, the Plame outing... everything.

And that's why Bush is playing it this way. Remember, too, that his "administration" is populated by Watergate and Iran-Contra recidivists, chief among them Dick Cheney, who has wanted to relitigate the boundaries of executive power since forever. Cheney and others on the inside believe that this time, with a friendlier judiciary, these issues can be decided the "right" way, overturning the victories won against Richard Nixon's insane theories of executive power.

Their thinking is that they'll either win it in courts, or run out the clock trying.

And the day they get five Justices to say they're right, everything you thought you knew about checks and balances becomes wrong.

Remember what's important is not the laws on the books but the enforcement of the laws on the books. Let's say one day that the only prosecutions that a government (federal, state, local) decides to undertake are to enforce laws which make it a crime to get prescription drugs from Canada. Mom, Dad, Grandma, Grandpa start getting prosecuted. The big fish over at Halliburton who overcharged the government billions are off the hook. Oh happy day.

That's what this case is about folks. First it's about what the US Attorneys office will be prosecuting: high-value government corruption (Lam) or "border prosecution". I don't know about you but I'd rather punish one big fish (Cunningham) than a hundred little fish who cross the border looking for work. Both crimes are against the law, but corruption in government eats away at the validity of the government. And, face it, crimes are not all equal. Some crimes are grave. Some misdemeanors.

Secondly, this case is about how to investigate government obfuscation and misdirection. Another key ingredient to good solid government.

Leahy, Conyers, DO YOUR JOBS. Take this case as high as it needs to go to be resolved and to restore the checks and balances that make this a solid democracy and not a banana republic.

Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior

NYTimes

Some animals are surprisingly sensitive to the plight of others. Chimpanzees, who cannot swim, have drowned in zoo moats trying to save others. Given the chance to get food by pulling a chain that would also deliver an electric shock to a companion, rhesus monkeys will starve themselves for several days.

Biologists argue that these and other social behaviors are the precursors of human morality.
,,,
Though human morality may end in notions of rights and justice and fine ethical distinctions, it begins, Dr. de Waal says, in concern for others and the understanding of social rules as to how they should be treated. At this lower level, primatologists have shown, there is what they consider to be a sizable overlap between the behavior of people and other social primates.

Social living requires empathy, which is especially evident in chimpanzees, as well as ways of bringing internal hostilities to an end. Every species of ape and monkey has its own protocol for reconciliation after fights, Dr. de Waal has found. If two males fail to make up, female chimpanzees will often bring the rivals together, as if sensing that discord makes their community worse off and more vulnerable to attack by neighbors. Or they will head off a fight by taking stones out of the males’ hands.

Dr. de Waal believes that these actions are undertaken for the greater good of the community, as distinct from person-to-person relationships, and are a significant precursor of morality in human societies.<
,,,
Religion can be seen as another special ingredient of human societies, though one that emerged thousands of years after morality, in Dr. de Waal’s view. There are clear precursors of morality in nonhuman primates, but no precursors of religion. So it seems reasonable to assume that as humans evolved away from chimps, morality emerged first, followed by religion. “I look at religions as recent additions,” he said. “Their function may have to do with social life, and enforcement of rules and giving a narrative to them, which is what religions really do.”

Aftermath of Ohio 2004

SFGate

Responding to a series of scandals, Ohio's new secretary of state said Monday that she has demanded the resignation of the entire four-member Elections Board of Cuyahoga County, which includes Cleveland.

Last week, in the latest development involving one of those scandals, two former Cuyahoga elections workers were sentenced to the maximum of 18 months in jail for manipulating a preliminary recount of the 2004 presidential election vote. The workers' goal had not been to affect the outcome but rather to avoid a more painstaking task in which all votes would have had to be recounted by hand rather than machine.

"When you have election workers going to prison for election-related offenses, it creates a crisis of confidence," Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, said in announcing that she spoke to the four board members Sunday night to urge them to resign. If they do not do so by Wednesday evening, Brunner said, she will begin a disciplinary process Thursday morning to force their ouster.
...
Brunner was elected in November as part of a near sweep of state offices by Democrats that reversed a Republican lock on statewide posts. The board she seeks to remove has two Democratic and two Republican members, including Robert Bennett, chairman of both the board and the Ohio Republican Party.
...
But the recount case has hardly been the only problem with elections in the county. Lines at the polls were hours long in 2004, and in the primary election last May, the county's first experience with electronic voting, poll workers were absent or poorly trained, computer cards on which votes had been recorded were lost, and one polling place opened hours late.

Now that's taking action. The two workers sentenced for manipulating the recount instill a lack of confidence in the entire system.

The one who votes decides nothing. The one who counts the vote decides everything.
~Joseph Stalin

Good for Brunner. Nice set of gonads on her.

White House Aides Don't Testify?

Oh really?!?!?

From ThinkProgress:

Senate Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT) has called on Karl Rove and other top White House aides to testify under oath in front of Congress concerning their role in the U.S. attorney purge. A response from White House Counsel Fred Fielding is expected today, but in the meantime, the White House and its allies have put up a fight, arguing that presidential advisers have historically not testified in front of Congress:

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow: Well, as you know, Ed, it has been traditional in all White Houses not to have staffers testify on Capitol Hill. [3/13/07]

White House Counselor Dan Bartlett: I find it highly unlikely that a member of the White House staff would testify publicly to these matters. [3/13/07]

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH): No, I think you’re violating a precedent there that should not be violated. … I believe that under the separation of powers, there are limits to the extent to which Congress can subpoena or demand testimony from those who were closest to the president. [3/15/07]

But in reality, there is no such precedent. According to the Congressional Research Service, under President Clinton, 31 of his top aides testified on 47 different occasions. The aides who testified included some of Clinton’s closest advisors:

Harold Ickes, Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff - 7/28/94

George Stephanopoulos, Senior Adviser to the President for Policy and Strategy - 8/4/94

John Podesta, Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary - 8/5/94

Bruce R. Lindsey, Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel to the President - 1/16/96

Samuel Berger, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs - 9/11/97

Beth Nolan, Counsel to the President - 5/4/00

In contrast, between 2000 and 2004, Bush allowed only one of his closest advisers, then-Assistant to the President for Homeland Security Tom Ridge, to appear in front of Congress. He has also refused three invitations from Congress for his aides to testify, a first since President Richard Nixon in 1972. Clinton did not refuse any.

Money for Iraq...No money for...

Cafeteria Inspections

Millions of children eat in school cafeterias that don’t get the twice-yearly health inspections required by Congress to help prevent food poisoning.

Schools are supposed to get two visits from health inspectors every year. But one in 10 schools didn’t get inspected at all last year, according to Agriculture Department data obtained by The Associated Press. Thirty percent were visited only once

...

The missed visits mirror a drop-off in food safety inspections by the Food and Drug Administration. A recent AP analysis found FDA inspections fell by nearly half between 2003 and 2006.

When inspections don’t happen in cafeterias, it’s not the school’s fault. Cafeteria workers don’t inspect themselves. It’s up to state and local health authorities to schedule inspections, and many health departments are severely understaffed, particularly those in small towns and rural areas.

In some places, “we could get down on our hands and knees and beg, but they are only staffed to do certain things, and you cannot get them to come twice a year,” said Janey Thornton, president of the School Nutrition Association and a child nutrition director in Hardin County, Ky., public schools."

Lovely.

Here's to the new dads...

...and, with luck and love, the new generation of children they are raising.

Happy quote

In what is surely a sign of modern life, recent research shows that over the past four decades, fathers like Clark have nearly tripled the hours they spend focused on their children.

They still lag behind American mothers, who put in about twice as many hours directly involved with their children and doing housework. But, as researcher Suzanne M. Bianchi put it, today's fathers "do a lot more than their fathers did."
...
Thinking about the generational change, Stuart Melnick, 44, said that it starts right at a baby's birth. In his father's era, he said, men stayed in the hospital waiting room and passed out cigars. Today, "every man I know" is in the delivery room, part of a child's life from the beginning.
...
Thinking of generational differences, he recalls that he once mentioned to his father the joy of having a baby sleep on his chest.

"Did you do that with us?" he asked his father.

"No, I never did," he recalled his father saying.

I don't remember the last time I read a story in the news about parenting that made me quite so happy. Thank heavens for these dads and all those like them who are partners in child rearing. Catharine is the joy that she is because we are both there for her. We are both her parents. If it was just me all the time, with David putting in a few token hours on the weekend, she would not be as wonderful and I would not be as happy.

Life is balance.

Workin' the Media and the Congress

No one, NO ONE, works the media better than the current administration. They understand it. They know all the right people. They manipulate it to their own ends and the media, mostly on-air and cable, allows itself to be used, spun, and "worked" because they know that most Americans won't ask probing questions, so why should they? Just act as administration stenographers, run your ads, take home your fat paycheck.

Start asking questions America. Stop letting yourself be "worked."

"The attorney general is extremely upset with the stories on the U.S. Attys this morning," Brian Roehrkasse, a department spokesman, e-mailed to his boss, Scolinos, and D. Kyle Sampson, Gonzales' chief of staff before he abruptly resigned this month.

Roehrkasse added that Gonzales "also thought some of DAG's [McNulty's] statements were inaccurate…. He wants to know what we can do from a comms [communications] perspective. I suggested a clearly worded op-ed and reaching out to ed [editorial] boards who will write in the coming days."

"I think from a straight news perspective we just want the stories to die."

Um, you forgot about the pesky American people, who don't want a story to "die" just becuase it's inconvenient.

With the scandal clearly not going away, Sampson then urged others at the department to try to get Cummins not to join other fired prosecutors in testifying on March 6. Cummins had warned officials that if called to Washington, he "would tell the truth about his circumstances" of being fired so Rove's operative, Timothy Griffin, could take over in Little Rock.

"I don't think he should" testify, Sampson said in an e-mail to McNulty and other top Justice Department officials.

Sampson wondered how Cummins would answer several key questions, such as why he was told he was being elbowed out, and whether Griffin expected to be appointed under a new provision of the Patriot Act that would allow him to skirt Senate confirmation.

Thank heavens for the subpoena.

Buh-bye Chiquita

AP

Banana company Chiquita Brands International admitted in federal court Monday that for years it paid Colombian terrorists to protect its most profitable banana-growing operation.
The company pleaded guilty to one count of doing business with a terrorist organization. The plea is part of a deal with prosecutors that calls for a $25 million fine and does not identity the several senior executives who approved the illegal protection payments.

I'm really getting sick and tired of the obvious way that the rich and powerful live their lives above the law. I mean, at least have the decency to do this stuff under the covers and through a few layers of phony companies like Halliburton does.

How is it that the "several senior executives" are not identified and not tried separately? Isn't this the post-9/11 world? Don't we do more than frown upon payments to designated terrorist organizations?!?! Aren't those types of activities the type that cause people to be named "enemy combatants?" I guess that's only true when you're poor or middle class and not a Republican donor.

Well, Chiquita, adios. Not ever again in our house.

A discussion of "immorality"

General Peter Pace in all his judgemental wisdom has been quoted as stating that homosexuality is "immoral." So Pete thinks homosexuality is wrong - because morals are a discussion of right and wrong behavior - and therefore something "immoral" is "wrong."

You have a General in the US of A army taking a stand on something that is of no concern to him. Because, regardless of how appalled some claim to be to have to live in the same world with avowed homosexuals, the act of homosexuality actually affects only those participating in it and those who, apparently, can't stop thinking about it.

Now, let's talk more about immorality. This same general is currently employed in a war of dubious merit wherein tens of thousands of innocent women, men and children have been blinded, burned, disfigured, crippled, and raped. This war has divided our nation and united our enemies. This war has gutted our treasury such that cutbacks are made on the backs of the women, men and children of this country. There is no money to improve teacher-student ratios, no money for better enforcement of laws already on the books, no money for better health care for Americans, but there are billions upon billions for Halliburton, Bechtel, GE, et al. What are the morals involved there?

Here's something else for the General to consider:

"In World War II, a British mathematician named Alan Turing led the effort to crack the Nazis' communication code," Simpson wrote. "[Turing] mastered the complex German enciphering machine, helping to save the world, and his work laid the basis for modern computer science. Does it matter that Turing was gay? Would Pace call Turing 'immoral'?"

Turing is recognized for his scientific and mathematical research, which led to the creation of personal computers, as well as his code-cracking. However, his life was tainted by tragedy. Despite his prominence and success, he was arrested in 1952 for being gay and, rather than going to jail, agreed to be injected with hormones in a bid to change his sexuality.

Here's another view on the topic from that great thinker of our times Sen. Sam Brownback:

However, Republican presidential hopeful Sen. Sam Brownback on Wednesday praised General Pace's "personal commitment to moral principles."

"The question is whether personal moral beliefs should disqualify an individual from positions of leadership in the U.S. military. We think not," Brownback said in a circulated letter. "General Pace's recent remarks do not deserve the criticism they have received."

Hey Brownback, that depends on what those "personal moral beliefs" are doesn't it? Isn't that blatantly obvious?!?!? Has the American education system descended to such a point that the reader of Brownback's offal doesn't immediately ask her/himself that question? What if your "personal moral beliefs" involve setting each person you meet on fire? I would say that YES, that definitely disqualifies you from a position of leadership in the US military. What a moran. If your "personal moral beliefs" are mostly guided by ancient literature with no discussion of rationality or relevance to the world then perhaps it's best that you not hold leadership positions in the US military in this very nuclear age.

But back to General Pace. Sir I respectfully ask that when it comes to your (and I use the term ever so lightly) "morals" you do as you admonish those in your military to do - DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL.

Alberto "Mistakes Have Been Made" Gonzalez must go

I wish it could put it so succinctly, but since I can't:

Here, then, are the Top 10 reasons why Gonzales must go.

Lying Under Oath
Purging Prosecutors
Misusing the Patriot Act's National Security Letters
Authorizing Illegal NSA Domestic Surveillance
Enabling John Yoo and Unchecked Presidential War Powers
Rendering the Geneva Conventions "Quaint"
Supporting Military Commissions and the End of Habeas Corpus
Blessing Unprecedented Expansion of Presidential Signing Statements
Facilitating a CIA Leak Cover-Up
Gutting Minority Voting Rights

Details at the link.

Btw, don't you love the "mistakes have been made" phrasing. As if the mistakes are the doers and they somehow "made" themselves. This is called the passive voice. It's famous in consulting circles where you don't want to put the blame squarely on anyone's shoulders for fear of insulting a client and thereby ending your lucrative relationship with them: "Taxes were not paid", "Vital documents were shredded"; "Embezzlement was enacted." Why doesn't Gonzo just say "so and so made a mistake" rather than the wimpy-ass "mistakes have been made." I thought the dems were supposed to be the pansies?!?!?

False "Choices"

The word "choice" is quite loaded. But beware when the administration uses it because they like to use it in instances when the "chooser" often has no "choice" at all. Case in point:

The Bush administration on Wednesday rejected key recommendations from a citizens' group asked by Congress to find out people's health care wishes.

Suggestions included guaranteeing health coverage for specific checkups and treatments and protecting consumers from high medical expenses. The group released its report Sept. 29 after hearing from about 6,500 people at 84 meetings.

President Bush agrees with many of the goals, but differs on how to achieve them, according to a letter from Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif.

The group "chose an approach based on mandates and government intervention rather than an approach emphasizing consumer choice and options," Leavitt said.

Let me translate that for you. It basically boils down to the republican mantra - let THE MARKET decide becuase THE MARKET is really the god of the republican party. But what about when the "consumer" (I love how we're always "consumers", i.e., those who consume, rather than "citizens" or "patients") has no choice at all because they have no money? When a child is born with crippling birth defects to a parent without means, what rosy airy-fairy "choices" would Bush have the parent make? Government is there for people who have no choice. Like those living close to chemical plants who don't want their ground water contaminated by heavy metals; those who drive on the highways who don't want to be crushed by improperly and over-loaded semis. We don't always have a choice in our circumstances. That is what government is for. To act as an enforcer to ensure that we are put into as few choice-less situations as possible.

Hey peeps, whassup with the visits?

I'm glad to have y'all, but I was really getting used to the 5-6 visits, 10-12 page views per day. What happened yesterday? Suddenly get a lot of extra time on your hands? Was it the Oprah post? Just wondering. Feel free to post a comment w/your thoughts. All rational discussion welcome. And in the words of Jed and Granny...

Y'all come back now, y'hear?

Of millions and billions - Which is more?

The stellar prioritization of the Bush Administration continues. $10 billion in unaccounted for charges to Halliburton and other defense contractors - NO PROBLEM. A pissant little $1 million for the VA to track soldiers - "PROHIBITIVE" - CUT IT!

A proposal to keep seriously wounded vets from falling through the cracks of the bureaucracy was shelved in 2005 when Jim Nicholson took over as the secretary of the Veterans Affairs Department, according to the former VA employee who was responsible for tracking war casualties.

As a result, seriously wounded veterans continued to face long delays for health care and benefit payments after being discharged from the military, says former VA project manager Paul Sullivan.

The program, called the Contingency Tracking System, had been approved by Nicholson's predecessor but died once Nicholson took over the VA, Sullivan told ABC News.

Sullivan said he was told the cost of the system -- less than $1 million to build and requiring a handful of staff to maintain -- was prohibitive.

That's the administration that up until very recently the majority of the country believed were good leaders, "compassionate" conservatives. Even today a whopping 30% of Americans believe these priorities are the right ones - ladle billions to your friends in oil and defense while cutting funding to vital programs for Americans.

Skewering Oprah's Philosophy and 'The Secret' in one fell swoop

Steve Martin used to do a routine that went like this: "You too can be a millionaire! It's easy: First, get a million dollars. Now..."

If you put that routine between hard covers, you'd have "The Secret," the self-help manifesto and bottle of minty-fresh snake oil currently topping the bestseller lists. "The Secret" espouses a "philosophy" patched together by an Australian talk-show producer named Rhonda Byrne. Though "The Secret" unabashedly appropriates and mishmashes familiar self-help clichés, it was still the subject of two recent episodes of "The Oprah Winfrey Show" featuring a dream team of self-help gurus, all of whom contributed to the project.

Peter Birkenhead does a thoughtful job of covering Oprah's increasing consumerism and anti-intellectualism in this Salon piece.

But what really makes "The Secret" more than a variation on an old theme is the involvement of Oprah Winfrey, who lends the whole enterprise more prestige, and, because of that prestige, more venality, than any previous self-help scam. Oprah hasn't just endorsed "The Secret"; she's championed it, put herself at the apex of its pyramid, and helped create a symbiotic economy of New Age quacks that almost puts OPEC to shame.

Why "venality"? Because, with survivors of Auschwitz still alive, Oprah writes this about "The Secret" on her Web site, "the energy you put into the world -- both good and bad -- is exactly what comes back to you. This means you create the circumstances of your life with the choices you make every day." "Venality," because Oprah, in the age of AIDS, is advertising a book that says, "You cannot 'catch' anything unless you think you can, and thinking you can is inviting it to you with your thought." "Venality," because Oprah, from a studio within walking distance of Chicago's notorious Cabrini Green Projects, pitches a book that says, "The only reason any person does not have enough money is because they are blocking money from coming to them with their thoughts."

I got turned off on Oprah years ago when she started doing "her favorite things" shows. The greed and self-absorption of the audience as they received trinket after trinket was truly nauseating. It's not like she goes out of her way to get people into the audience for these shows who really need new spa slippers. Nope, other than when she gave away the cars, the normal "favorite things" shows give useless knick-knacks to upper-middle women who really should be ashamed to show their gluttony on national television.

Oprah has obscene amounts of money and a soapbox as large as the country. Rather than using it to teach (in a fun infotainment way, I understand that it has to be infotainment lest people turn the channel) people about critical thinking, about what's going on in the country and the world, about how to TAKE ACTION, she often will have one heartfelt show about Darfur followed by days on end of hollywood celebrities hawking perfume and "which jeans make your ass look best" shows.

I don't know much about 'The Secret'. I was sent an email by a multi-level marketing friend - so that made me suspect right away. What I have investigated leads me to concur with Birkenhead. Positive thinking is all well and good, but blaming people for their circumstances - brutal rapes in war-torn parts of the globe leading to death by fistula for example - is just vicious.

Go on, take the money, and run

Halliburton skips town:

Oil services giant Halliburton Co. will soon shift its corporate headquarters from Houston to the Mideast financial powerhouse of Dubai, chief executive Dave Lesar announced Sunday.

"Halliburton is opening its corporate headquarters in Dubai while maintaining a corporate office in Houston," spokeswoman Cathy Mann said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. "The chairman, president and CEO will office from and be based in Dubai to run the company from the UAE."

Cheney was Halliburton's chief executive from 1995-2000 and the Bush administration has been accused of favoring the conglomerate with lucrative no-bid contracts in Iraq.
...
Federal investigators last month alleged Halliburton was responsible for $2.7 billion of the $10 billion in contractor waste and overcharging in Iraq.

Hmmm, could it be because of the federal investigations and any related indictments? Could it be so that "documents", should they ever be subpoenaed, would be so much harder to actually get? Could it be to lessen that oh so onerous tax burden?

Some Halliburton fun facts:

"Halliburton has taken care to isolate its entities that continue to work in Iran from contact with U.S. citizens or managers of U.S. companies, so as to insure that all work in Iran is undertaken independently, without any facilitation, authorization or approval from U.S. citizen managers. The Board should be assured however, that the U.S. Sanctions do not prohibit them as individuals, or as the Halliburton Company Board of Directors, from having knowledge of the activity there."

"Principal activity in Iran occurs through the operations of Halliburton Products & Services, Limited, a Cayman Islands company, headquartered in Dubai, U.A.E. (hereinafter HPSL). HPSL performs between $30 and $40 million annually in oilfield service work in Iran, consisting of cementing, completions work, downhole tools and well testing, stimulation services, PDC drilling bits, coring bits, fluids logging and the provision of drilling fluids."

Yes, our friends at Halliburton doing business with Iran - even though US companies are not supposed to - because, you know, the "axis of evil" thing. But then there's that Cayman Islands go-between company. That sounds legit, no? And now one of the biggest beneficiaries of military contracts in the war on terror will be headquartered in a Middle Eastern country.

Yes boys and girls, Halliburton has been just great for this country. Just great.

That is all. Please return to "American Idol" and/or "Dancing with the Stars."

Focus on Humanity

A struggle for control of the evangelical agenda intensified this week, with some leaders declaring that the focus has strayed too far from their signature battles against abortion and gay rights.

Those issues defined the evangelical movement for more than two decades — and cemented ties with the Republican Party. But in a caustic letter, leaders of the religious right warned that these "great moral issues of our time" were being displaced by a "divisive and dangerous" alignment with the left on global warming.

A new generation of pastors has expanded the definition of moral issues to include not only global warming, but an array of causes. Quoting Scripture and invoking Jesus, they're calling for citizenship for illegal immigrants, universal healthcare and caps on carbon emissions.

The best-known champion of such causes, the Rev. Jim Wallis, this week challenged conservative crusader James C. Dobson, the chairman of Focus on the Family, to a debate on evangelical priorities.

The LA Times reports on a schism in the Evangelical movement.

Focus on the Genitals Family leader James Dobson is a charletan in my opinion. What is the point of focusing on the family if you don't focus on healthcare, living wage jobs, justice for all? Pro-life doesn't end once the life passes through the vaginal canal does it? All the focus in Focus on the Family is really focus on the genitals. Who's putting whose where? Are they the right kind (you know an innie and an outie); in the right place? That's not a focus on the family.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard a pro-lifer go on about 3000 abortions today or 1 million abortions this year or 45 million abortions since Roe. What I have NEVER heard them talk about are the TEN TIMES AS MANY CHILDREN WITH MINDS AND MEMORIES who die each year from preventable causes - diahrea, dehydration, curable disease, poverty. Fetuses in America are just more important, I guess, than actual born children with minds and memories anywhere else in the world.

I hope that in time the evangelical movement may find its way back to Christ and the Sermon on the Mount. America has been divided by the Focus on the Genitals long enough.

Character beats thinking and doing

For all the policy blueprints churned out by presidential campaigns, there is this indisputable fact: People care less about issues than they do about a candidate's character.

A new Associated Press-Ipsos poll says 55 percent of those surveyed consider honesty, integrity and other values of character the most important qualities they look for in a presidential candidate.

Just one-third look first to candidates' stances on issues; even fewer focus foremost on leadership traits, experience or intelligence.

I find this pretty upsetting. What it means to me is that an actor will always beat an leader when it comes to our nation's highest office (paging Mr. Ronald Reagan). How sad. What does a person have to do to demonstrate "character?" I guess stand up straight, talk a lot about honesty and "values." Yeah, we all know how well that works out.

I want a person with vision first and a leader second (very close second). I want someone who can articulate a plan for the nation and then help guide us there. I really don't care what a politician does in their "off hours." If it's illegal, he or she should be charged and removed from office. If it's not illegal, like having affairs (Clinton, Guiliani, Gingrich, McCain), I couldn't give a rip. If it's somewhere in between - like lying through your teeth from sun-up to sundown, well I think I know what that's like now - and with someone who's supposedly got great "character."

Wake-up America. Character can be faked. It is completely objective. If you really think you know what a politician is "like" behind the scenes, you're dreaming. You will only be told what you need to be told in order for the "front-runners" to keep being out in front. Remember when the press hid JFK's affairs. You don't think they're still hiding? How many people have seen George Bush giving the middle finger on camera? YouTube

On the other hand, staking out a position and leading toward it cannot be faked. It either succeeds or fails. It is measurable. It objective. You know, kinda like how things run in a business? And we're always told that government should be run more like a business. Do you think the Fortune 500 seeks their leaders based on character?!?!?! or the ability to get things done?

A trip to the china shop

This past holiday season several friends went out for a day of shopping. There were 7 of us all together and we wandered through a large upscale mall in the area looking for the perfect gifts.

We headed into the large department store at one end of the mall. Eventually we made our way to the housewares department.

Browsing through the shelves of Waterford and tables covered in artistically arranged Royal Doulton, a couple of shoppers started "horsing around." I and my closest friend told the others to knock it off - tossing plates around stopped being funny in junior high.

Of course the rest of the gang, having fun, just started up'ing the stakes. At one point, one of my friends started juggling a couple of figurines. In an effort to stop her, another friend lurched toward her knocking over a small table covered in Ralph Lauren china.

One of the salespeople headed over and immediately demanded restitution for the breakage. You know the old adage, you break it, you ....

Of course none of the above is true. But it comes to mind upon hearing and reading my fellow citizens spout the "we broke it, we bought it" axiom in light of Iraq.

Thing is, I didn't break it. I attended anti-war gatherings. I wrote letters to the editor. I talked to everyone I could about the inanity of going to war in Iraq when people like Scott Ritter were out there day after day telling anyone who would listen that there were no WMDs in Iraq.

And yet, somehow because I just happened to be in the same china shop as the bulls, I am somehow expected to ''buy" into the idea that the US should stay in Iraq indefinitely. If the administration has been so wrong about so many things related to Iraq, how do we know that they are not wrong about what would happen if the US leaves it? I don't even mean that we should leave entirely. Pulling back to the borders, training, running anti-terrorist operations - all make sense. What doesn't make sense is staying in Iraq another 2 or 5 or 10 or 20 years just because some arrogant bull-headed politicians decided to come up with the answer before asking all the right questions.

In Honor of International Women's Day - A Celebration of...The Father

Children are more likely to suffer development problems if their fathers do not take paternity leave or spend enough time with them when they are very young, according to an analysis of thousands of babies born around the turn of the millennium.
A report published today by the Equal Opportunities Commission and based on research tracking 19,000 children born in 2000 and 2001 found emotional and behavioural problems were more common by the time youngsters reached the age of three if their fathers had not taken time off work when they were born, or had not used flexible working to have a more positive role in their upbringing.
...
The analysis finds no evidence that mothers' employment influences the extent of development problems in three-year-old children - in contrast to research published in 2005 by the childcare expert Penelope Leach which suggested young children looked after by their mothers did better than those cared for in nurseries or by relatives.

Indeed, it suggests that children who, at nine to 10 months, received formal childcare while their mothers worked had a lower likelihood of development problems at age three than those who were cared for by a parent or in other informal childcare such as by grandparents.

As a mother I can see the benefit of David's involvement in all area's of Catharine's upbringing. Since she's been born he's been there for the nighttime wakeups; for the diaper changes; for the bumps. He's also there for the little squeezy hugs around the neck; the giggles; the silly songs complete with Ray Charles head action.

It is a beautiful thing to see that we are her parents. We may be different, but she recognizes us each as a parent. Not "mommy who's here all the time and then that guy that I see on the weekends 'cause he's always at work,"

There is no act more loving, in my opinion, than a man who comforts and takes pains to understand his child/children. So on International Women's Day I say, Men, if you want to honor your partner, step up and be a part of the family. Not the sole bread-winner. Not the disciplinarian. Not the "head." But a fully functioning, full partner in child rearing. It's good for you, good for mom, and great for your children.

WalMart blocking port security measures

WalMart continues to block meaningful port security. As a citizen in a port city, I can say that waiting until the attack comes before acting is beyond reprehensible.

It's interesting too that business is always up in arms about this regulation or that regulation, talking about how regulations just cost money and provide no benefit. Unless of course, if the government passes a "regulation" like a barrier to new competition (generic drug waits); or a regulation that aids a corporation (increasing patent life on Disney characters), well that's just fine. Then regulations are just fine and to be obeyed.

It's also interesting that the silly-old-government is just a bureaucracy and doesn't really know how to do things well. Look at how Norquist is already reframing the Walter Reed issue to be about government incompetence rather than government privitazation - which was at least partly to blame - see post below.

How come when it comes to executing a military action in Iraq, suddenly the government can handle one of the most challenging jobs out there? As far as I can tell, the DoD is part of the government. How come people don't refer to the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines as "bureaucrats?" And granted, the military action in Iraq has been handled ineffectively, but up until about a year ago, most of the country was behind the military action and had no problem with "the government" being in the lead.

When will Americans get that there's nothing inherently "good" about corporations and nothing inherently "bad" about government. They each have their place. What is bad is when corporations usurp the role of government by building too much power and wealth in the hands of the very few.


Here is a link to an ad that will be run to inform Americans about WalMart's resistance to greater port security.

A look inside CPAC

Here's a YouTube of Max Blumenthal at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) including Coulter's little "joke" about Edwards. You know, those "faggot" jokes, they really have them rolling in the aisles.

It's interesting to me how both liberals and conservatives claim that the "other side hates" them, but appear to notice no hate in their own ranks. Personally, I don't "hate" conservatives. I'd love to be able to talk to more of them and have an honest respectful dialogue. So, hey, conservatives, let's talk. In the end, there's conversation and there's confrontation. I vote for conversation.

Domenici admits he "contacted" prosecutor

OK, for those who aren't up to speed (NYT):

After Daniel G. Bogden got the call in December telling him that he was being dismissed as the United States attorney in Nevada, he pressed for an explanation.

Mr. Bogden, who was named the top federal prosecutor in Nevada in 2001 after 11 years of working his way up at the Justice Department, asked an official at the agency’s headquarters if the firing was related to his performance or to that of his office. “That didn’t enter into the equation,” he said he was told.
...
The ouster of Mr. Bogden and seven other United States attorneys has set off a furor in Washington that took the Bush administration by surprise.

Summoning five of the dismissed prosecutors for hearings on Tuesday, the newly empowered Congressional Democrats have charged that the mass firing is a political purge, intended to squelch corruption investigations or install less independent-minded successors.

OK. Two things. One, the Bush administration is obviously having trouble catching up to the post-11/7 world. The firing of eight prosecutors and the Walter Reed story are evidence of this. The admin. thinks they can just sweep this stuff under the rug like they used to when the Republics ran things on Capitol Hill. But the power of the majority (even if it is less than awe-inspiring so far) at least brings with it the power of the subpoena. The Dems want to know whassup with firing so many prosecutors, especially since there were good evaluations in 5 or 6 cases. One of the prosecutors was Carol C. Lam of San Diego, who successfully prosecuted former Representative Randy Cunningham. Sounds like a keeper to me. But no, she's out and a former aide to presidential adviser Karl Rove is in, since our boy Al Gonzalez can name the replacements, without Senate confirmation, thanks to a little-noticed provision of the Patriot Act. Naw, that doesn't sound like politics. Does it??!?!

Two, the Bush administration is obviously having trouble catching up to the Inter-tubes. Again, in the pre-inter-tube era, the news "cycle" was 24 hours - at best. If you could last through the 24-hour cycle, you were golden baby. But now those damn blogs, those uppity bloggers, they can keep a story going - and sometimes growing - for days or weeks. So trying to just fire eight prosecutors and replace them with political friends and hoping no one notices, doesn't work so well anymore. Here's the money quote:

They failed to anticipate how much attention the highly unusual group firing would draw, and the agency’s contradictory accounts about whether the dismissals were performance-related helped spur suspicions.

Anywho, back to Domenici. From WaPo:

Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) acknowledged yesterday that he contacted the U.S. attorney in Albuquerque last year to ask about an ongoing corruption probe of Democrats, but said he "never pressured him nor threatened him in any way."

Domenici also said in a statement he told the Justice Department it should replace U.S. Attorney David C. Iglesias, but said the recommendation came before his call to Iglesias about the criminal investigation.
...
Legal experts say it violates congressional ethics rules for a senator or House member to communicate with a federal prosecutor regarding an ongoing criminal investigation.

The audacity of the Republicans still can amaze me - even after 6 years of living through one audacious power play after another - from the President, the vice-President, Congress, Lobbyists, etc. You'd think I'd be inured to it by now. But no, still smacks me between the eyes how this group of government-haters has firmly seized the reins of government and treat it like a spoils system to reward friends and business associates. From Halliburton to Rove's protege, they look at government as nothing less than a way to siphon money from Joe & Judy Taxpayer up to Biff & Muffy Inheritance. Reminds me of how the traders at Enron viewed Grandma Millie as nothing more than a piggy-bank to break open and loot.

War on "Class Warfare"

David Brooks was on the News Hour last night trying feebly to support his neo-con views in the face of reality (which, we all know, has a liberal bias). At one point he tut-tuted Mark Shields about "oh, that's class warfare." As though calling it "class warfare" makes it something other than "class warfare." Watch how nervous the neo-cons get when you even suggest that there is a desire by the privileged to stay privileged, even at the expense of the less-privileged.

Personally, I prefer the term "class imposition" because class is mostly imposed on you, though it is possible to move between classes. But "class" is more than money. Here's a wonderful NYT graphic about the four components of class: occupation, education, income and wealth. Most people tend to think in terms of income alone, but really wealth (you know, especially your parents' wealth that you inherit) has a lot more to do with in in my opinion. Most people also think that they're "middle class", but see where you really fall.

I find the term "class warfare" interesting though. Especially since it used so often by those in the "higher" class. You will rarely hear a day-laborer talk about "class warfare.". I find the "warfare" part the most interesting. Yes, there are millions or maybe even billions of people who would like the insane money of the top couple of percent of incomes to be more equitably distributed. But why "warfare"? In the neo-cons unimaginative little minds, they can only see themselves as hunkered down in their castle keep, while the lowly stinking peasants besiege them. They can't imagine that wealth-equity can come about as a result of politics. That's because they have "politics" locked up - with money. You want in on "politics" you promise to prevent "class warfare."

It'll never change until people believe that it can change; and until people are looking for a politician who can honestly and eloquently talk about wealth-equity (i.e., "class warfare"). Paging Mr. Edwards, Mr. John Edwards.

Money (i.e., Halliburton) the root of all evil

From Army Times

The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has subpoenaed Maj. Gen. George Weightman, who was fired as head of Walter Reed Army Medical Center, after Army officials refused to allow him to testify before the committee Monday.

Committee Chairman Henry Waxman and subcommittee Chairman John Tierney asked Weightman to testify about an internal memo that showed privatization of services at Walter Reed could put “patient care services… at risk of mission failure.”

The memorandum “describes how the Army’s decision to privatize support services at Walter Reed Army Medical Center was causing an exodus of ‘highly skilled and experienced personnel,’” the committee’s letter states. “According to multiple sources, the decision to privatize support services at Walter Reed led to a precipitous drop in support personnel at Walter Reed.”

The letter said Walter Reed also awarded a five-year, $120-million contract to IAP Worldwide Services, which is run by Al Neffgen, a former senior Halliburton official.

Why am I not surprised? Since this administration is such a big fan of privatization and outsourcing, where do we go to outsource the administration?

Time for one about Catharine

It's impossible not to love her more every day. Every day she is more a person - to me that means she has her own mind and memories; her own way of reasoning out the world. Of course you love them when they're little - but for me it was a love of protection and hope for the future. Now it is a love in the present tense. I love who she is. She is kind and caring. She is quick and funny. She is lovely.





She tells me now that she is "proud of you." I'm not sure what that means to her, but it's awfully nice to hear. I'm proud of you too, peanut.

Meet the new one, same as the old one

YESTERDAY THE Post reported that Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley heard years ago from a veterans advocate and even a member of Congress that outpatient care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center was distressingly squalid and disorganized. That commander proceeded to do little, even though he lives across the street from the outpatient facilities in a spacious Georgian house. Also yesterday, the Army announced that Maj. Gen. George W. Weightman, the head of Walter Reed since August, had been relieved of his command. His temporary replacement? None other than Gen. Kiley.

Yeah, the razor-sharp Bush administration is at it again. Of all the capable generals in the army, wouldn't you think the folks in the administration could find someone to lead Walter Reed other than someone who's already known as an ignorer of the troops? From WaPo

Much of The Post's article detailed the abuse by omission that Gen. Kiley, not Gen. Weightman, committed, first as head of Walter Reed, then in his current post as Army surgeon general. Gen. Weightman, who very well might deserve his disgrace, has commanded Walter Reed for only half a year, while Gen. Kiley, now back in charge of Walter Reed, headed the hospital and its outpatient facilities for two years and has led the Army's medical command since. Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) and his wife say they repeatedly told Gen. Kiley about unhealthful conditions in outpatient facilities.

Heckuva job there Kiley.

Cantwell's number: (202) 224-3441
Murray's number: (202) 224-2621

Make the call folks. This is how you REALLY support the troops. Bumper stickers don't mean squat!

So how about if we at least TRY 50-50 representation?

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The share of female politicians around the world reached a record of high of almost 17 percent in 2006 -- up nearly 6 percentage points during the past decade -- a global parliamentary group said on Thursday.

The Inter-Parliamentary Union also found women presided over 35 of the world's 262 parliaments -- another record high -- with females elected to the position for the first time in Gambia, Israel, Swaziland, Turkmenistan and the United States, where Nancy Pelosi is now House speaker.

But the rate of increase in female legislators has slowed, the group said.

"The bad news is that the increase in the number of women is slower than it was in the preceding year and if we are aiming for equality in parliament ... then we will wait until the year 2077 to celebrate that event," said Anders Johnsson, the Inter-Parliamentary Union's secretary-general.

Reuters

Maybe women would be better as political leaders, maybe they would be worse. Maybe (probably) both. But how about after millions of years of evolution and thousands of years of "civilization" we give 50-50 representation a shot? How about we at least ACKNOWLEDGE that maybe, given our enormous technical advances, our wealth, our intellect - across the world - that maybe, just possibly, things could be (SO FREAKIN' MUCH) better than they are. And that maybe, goin' out on a limb here, women could help us get to a better place? Ya think?